Practice English Reading Exercises for B2 – Mass Media, Social Media & Advertising 9

Exercises:   123456

Reading 1

You are going to read an article about four people reflecting on the phenomenon of “cancel culture” fueled by mass media.

For questions 1-10, choose from the people/sections (A-D). The people/sections may be chosen more than once.

Which person/section

1   points out the financial motivation behind spreading online anger?

2   expresses remorse for having previously taken part in collective online attacks?

3   heavily restricts what they post on the internet due to a fear of backlash?

4   highlights the injustice of destroying someone’s reputation over long-forgotten comments?

5   believes that the current digital environment denies individuals the opportunity to grow?

6   claims that social networking sites are deliberately structured to provoke outrage?

7   notes the crucial distinction between holding someone responsible and entirely ruining their life?

8   argues that the threat of public humiliation is putting an end to open and honest discussions?

9   suggests that the media actively amplifies minor errors to create sensational stories?

10   proposes that society needs to rediscover the concept of granting people a second chance?

The Unforgiving Screen: Navigating Cancel Culture in the Digital Age

A Leo

A few years ago, I used to eagerly jump on the bandwagon whenever a prominent figure messed up online. It felt almost like a game, getting caught up in the collective outrage to call out someone’s poor behaviour. However, after witnessing the devastating psychological toll this public humiliation took on a relatively unknown individual, I experienced a harsh wake-up call. I deeply regret having contributed to those relentless virtual attacks. The fundamental problem with this culture of cancellation is that it demands absolute perfection from flawed human beings. If someone makes a clumsy error, they are immediately permanently exiled, which completely deprives them of the space to learn and evolve from their blunders. We seem to have lost sight of the fact that making mistakes is exactly how we develop. Instead of guiding people towards making better choices, the internet simply acts as a ruthless judge and jury.

B Maya

While it’s easy to blame ordinary users for the toxic atmosphere online, I believe the true culprits are the tech giants and mass media outlets. Outrage is incredibly profitable. We have to come to terms with the fact that social networking platforms are intentionally programmed to push controversial, anger-inducing content because that is exactly what keeps users scrolling and clicking. The longer we stay angry, the more money they generate from advertising. Furthermore, traditional news websites often fan the flames. They will take a minor, poorly judged comment and blow it completely out of proportion just to secure a sensational, clickbait headline. People’s careers can be ruined overnight simply because a media corporation needed to meet its daily quota for viral stories. Until we recognise that this relentless cycle of digital fury is a highly lucrative business model, society will remain bitterly divided.

C Toby

As someone who runs a relatively popular video blog, the constant threat of ‘cancellation’ looms over me like a dark cloud. The digital landscape has become an absolute minefield, and I find myself second-guessing every single word I type. Even a completely innocent joke can be taken out of context and twisted into something malicious by anonymous critics. Consequently, I have severely limited what I share on my profiles, sticking strictly to safe, uncontroversial topics to avoid any potential backlash. This intense climate of fear is incredibly damaging because it completely shuts down genuine, honest debate. People are so terrified of saying the wrong thing and having their reputations ruined that they simply stop expressing their true opinions. We are creating a society where people merely echo the majority view rather than engaging in meaningful discussions that could actually bring about positive social change.

D Elena

There is a massive difference between holding a powerful person accountable for a genuine crime and completely destroying someone’s livelihood over a tasteless joke they made on the internet ten years ago. It genuinely terrifies me how amateur online detectives will dig through a decade of someone’s digital history just to unearth an outdated, poorly phrased remark. It is incredibly unfair to judge the person they are today by the foolish things they posted when they were a teenager. While accountability is undoubtedly important, our current digital society completely lacks a framework for redemption. Once you have been labelled a villain, the stain is permanent. If we want a healthier culture, we desperately need to revive the concept of giving people a second chance. Without the possibility of forgiveness and a clear path to make amends, we are just indulging in endless, pointless revenge.

Reading 2

You are going to read an article about four individuals discussing the invasive nature of telemarketing and spam calls, and their strategies for dealing with persistent salespeople.

For questions 1-10, choose from the people/sections (A-D). The people/sections may be chosen more than once.

Which person/section

1   feels a certain amount of pity for the people working in the call centres?

2   deliberately keeps the callers on the line as a form of retaliation?

3   admits that their protective software sometimes prevents important calls from coming through?

4   questions the callers about how they acquired their contact details?

5   mistakenly terminated a conversation with a genuine caller?

6   confesses that their method of dealing with scammers wastes their own free time?

7   relies on a voice message system to screen unfamiliar numbers?

8   uses the threat of reporting the company to deter persistent salespeople?

9   struggles to find an opportunity to speak during the sales pitch?

10   points out that the individuals making the calls have become increasingly deceptive?

Ringing Off the Hook: Dealing with Digital Age Interruptions

A Mark

I used to get incredibly worked up about telemarketers interrupting my dinner. At first, I’d try to politely explain that I wasn’t interested, but they would simply ignore my protests. Eventually, I came to terms with the fact that engaging was utterly pointless. I decided to install a highly-rated spam-blocking app on my smartphone. For the most part, it’s been a lifesaver, automatically filtering out known nuisance callers before the phone even rings. However, it’s far from foolproof. The algorithm occasionally goes completely overboard, meaning that legitimate numbers are sometimes blocked. Just last month, an urgent call from my dentist was mistakenly categorised as a scam by the app! Consequently, I’ve had to adopt a new policy: if a number flashing on the screen is not recognised, I absolutely refuse to pick up. I simply let it go straight to voicemail. If it’s a genuine contact, a message will be left; if it’s a salesperson, they invariably hang up.

B Sarah

I know a lot of people who scream at telemarketers or blow whistles down the phone, but I just can’t bring myself to do that. Deep down, I actually feel rather sorry for the individuals on the other end of the line. It must be a soul-destroying job, dealing with constant rejection and hostility for minimum wage. That said, their persistence is incredibly aggravating. The main issue I have is that they are trained to deliver their scripts at breakneck speed. You literally cannot get a word in edgeways to politely decline their offer! I used to just put the phone down, but that backfired terribly once when I abruptly cut off a recruiter who was calling to offer me a job interview. If I hadn’t been so hasty, I wouldn’t have had to call back and apologise profusely. Since that embarrassing incident, I force myself to listen for exactly ten seconds before firmly stating that I am not interested.

C David

In recent years, the sheer volume of unsolicited calls has skyrocketed, and I must say, the tactics they employ are becoming far more cunning. It used to be obvious when a telemarketer was calling, but nowadays their numbers are cleverly disguised to look like local businesses. Once I realised how sophisticated their trickery had become, I decided to change my approach. Instead of getting angry, I started playing along to string them along for as long as possible. I pretend to be highly interested, asking them to repeat complex details or feigning confusion. It’s my own petty form of payback for the nuisance they cause. However, I’ll be the first to admit that this strategy is somewhat flawed. While it’s highly amusing to keep a scammer occupied for twenty minutes, I am essentially throwing away my own precious evening just to make a point. Still, knowing I’ve prevented them from bothering someone else during that time feels great.

D Elena

What genuinely infuriates me about the current epidemic of cold callers isn’t just the interruption itself, but the blatant invasion of privacy. I am exceedingly careful about my online footprint, rarely ticking the boxes that allow companies to share my details. Therefore, whenever my phone rings with an unsolicited offer, my immediate reaction is to go on the offensive. Instead of hanging up, I interrogate the caller, demanding to know exactly which third-party broker sold them my contact information. Naturally, the question is usually dodged or a vague script is offered in response. That is when I bring up data protection laws. I make it abundantly clear that a formal complaint will be submitted to the telecommunications regulator if my profile is not erased immediately. Often, just the mere mention of legal consequences is enough to make them instantly drop the call. Unless we push back aggressively against this corporate data trading, the spam will never cease.

Exercises:   123456